1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 August 2016 b. Date Received: 26 August 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the Army consider the reason why he was having issues with drugs at the time of discharge. He served multiple tours in the Persian Gulf Theater without incident. He asked his commander for assistance in getting his wife to Germany; and he said f your wife. That instance along with the painful injuries incurred on his first deployment, which he sought medical help ended in his state of severe psychosis. His military record, NOCERs and awards will show exemplary service. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) the applicant may have had mitigating behavioral health conditions at the time that led to the applicant's discharge. There was likely a nexus between a behavioral health or medical condition and the misconduct to mitigate the misconduct. Neither PTSD, Anxiety Disorder nor TBI mitigates the offense of going to the Netherlands without a pass. In record review hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 February 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and a post-service diagnosis of TBI and OBH. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 18 March 2008 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 August 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; wrongfully using marijuana between (2 March 2007 and 31 March 2007); and violating the battalion's pass policy, by traveling to the Netherlands without a valid pass. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 August 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 5 March 2008, the separation approving authority approved the findings and recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's separation with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 September 2004 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 years / HS Graduate / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 63H10, Tracked Vehicle Mechanic / 6 years, 10 months, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 26 April 2001 to 29 September 2004 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / SWA / Iraq, 2 November 2005 to 2 November 2006 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AAM, AGCM-2, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: 1 August 2006 to 28 February 2007, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: A positive urinalysis test coded CO (Competence for Duty / Command Directed / Fitness for duty) dated 31 March 2007, for THC. Military Police Report, dated 10 May 2007, indicates the applicant was under investigation for controlled substance violations, possession of marijuana, use of marijuana, on post Military Police Report dated 12 June 2007, relates the applicant was under investigation for controlled substance violations, possession of hallucinogens, smuggling marijuana, smuggling hallucinogens and possession of marijuana, off post. FG Article 15 dated 18 June 2007, for wrongful use of marijuana between (2 March 2007 and 31 March 2007); reduction to SPC / E-4, forfeiture of $1,031 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 26 July 2007, relates that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of PTSD and cannabis abuse. Letter, Dr. W, licensed psychologist, 25 January 2008, shows that the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, not otherwise specified and prescribed medication for treatment. Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings, dated 20 September 2016, relates the applicant was unfit for the diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood and insomnia. Cedar Springs Behavioral Health System Discharge Summary, dated 13 December 2017, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment reaction with disturbance of mood and conduct and PTSD. Also, he has a history of TBI and was not prescribed any medication. VA progress notes, dated 19 December 2017, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with severe anxiety, PTSD and insomnia. He was not prescribed any medication for treatment of his conditions. Report of Medical Examination, date illegible, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 149 (two pages); letter, Montezuma County Veterans Service Office; two memoranda, Behavioral Health Clinic, Baumholder Health Clinic (four pages); letter, DA, BG Crawford F. Sams, TUS Army Health Clinic, (two pages); Jonesboro VA Clinic documents (six pages); Cedar Springs Behavioral Health System documents (13 pages); laboratory results (three pages); social work case management note (two pages); appearance notification form; Department of Veterans Affairs , Statement in Support of Claim; applicant's military background (five pages); VA decision letter (two pages); DD Form 214; informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings (six pages); certification letter for individuals ready to deploy; discharge summary (two pages); coversheet, inpatient treatment record; prescription refill (four pages); chronological records of medical care (five pages); triage form (two pages); Report of Mental Status Evaluation (two pages); Report of medical examination (three pages); hearing test; letter, Dr. W, licensed psychologist; OMPF documents (86 pages); promotion orders to SGT; and a Military Police Report (ten pages). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Paragraph 14-12c(2) terms abuse of illegal drugs as serious misconduct. It continues; however, by recognizing relevant facts may mitigate the nature of the offense. Therefore, a single drug abuse offense may be combined with one or more minor disciplinary infractions or incidents of other misconduct and processed for separation under paragraph 14-12a or 14-12b as appropriate. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge may be granted. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a NCO. The applicant, as a NCO, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, that the Army consider the reason why he was having issues with drugs at the time of discharge. AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self-referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance. The applicant further contends, he served multiple tours in the Persian Gulf Theater without incident; and his military record, NOCERs and awards will show exemplary service. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant also contends, he asked his commander for assistance in getting his wife to Germany; and he said f your wife. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his commander made the remark regarding his spouse. The applicant additionally contends, that instance along with the painful injuries incurred on his first deployment, which he sought medical help ended in his state of severe psychosis. The service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In record review hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 February 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and a post-service diagnosis of TBI and OBH. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160015225 1